Forum:Creating a page for every single weapon
Dear MAG Wiki community, I am an experienced user from the Call of Duty Wiki which has recently gotten MAG. Now, I have been asked to help this wiki out by a fellow Bureaucrat, Blinzy45. I have noticed that this wiki looks messy and generally unprofessional, and I am sorry if this sounds a bit harsh. Now, to make this wiki neater, we have chosen to revamp the whole wiki, word for word. I would like to start by creating a page for every single weapon. This will not only make the wiki look neater, it will also make searching for a certain weapon a lot more easier and it will look much more professional. I will begin starting now, and anybody who is wanting to help can contribute. I asked Blinzy45 for permission, and it got granted. Thank you for your time. Regards, Commander W567123danielWanna Talk?| |Wassup? 01:42, August 12, 2010 (UTC) I would recommend that you guys either 1. change your skin or 2. somehow change the coding in Template:Gunbox if you want to see the info... Also, all future weapon articles, if you choose to help me, should orientate themselves on the APEX 100 article, which is our first weapon article. Hip, hip, hooray! Commander W567123danielWanna Talk?| |Wassup? 02:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) Dan: There is a glitch that makes all infoboxes lacking in a picture go blank that way. Perhaps that is it? Dolten Let's Talk 02:25, August 12, 2010 (UTC) Yeah, what do you think I have been doing? I agree that weapons should have their own pages. What I disagree on is your method of showing the stats. Where do you get the recoil stats that actually say 'high'? We should stick to what we are given: Damage, Accuracy, Stability, Rate, and Rounds... with the number data. With that being said, the APEX 100 article is quite horrid and full of personal thoughts. Also, the gunbox template has no documentation. Endofzero 02:52, August 12, 2010 (UTC) :The Gunbox template is from a familiar wikia, which does have game data and stuff. I basically had to change all of the names, and I tried to leave as much as possible for information. As for the APEX100 article, yes, it is horrible, but I'm not good at writing articles. Now, this leads to a next point: Should we include Real Life information? Commander W567123danielWanna Talk?| |Wassup? 21:10, August 12, 2010 (UTC) I would say no. While the guns are modeled after real guns, they are still fictitious in nature. This may lead to some arguments as well as I have already seen some back-and-forths between what a gun is modeled after. If Zipper doesn't tell us, then it's mostly speculation, save for obvious ones like the F90. Lol... Familiar wikia? You mean COD? They really don't have much in common, did the gunbox had a /doc page from the other wikia? If so, I would recommend copying that as well. I'll see what I can do about cleaning up that template so it is actually functional for this wikia. Endofzero 21:21, August 12, 2010 (UTC) The APEX 100 article is fine. It can be improved, but right now we are working on getting every weapon a page. The statements in the gunbox are technically correct as we do not have the games coding to refer to on that stuff. Blinzy[45] 03:01, August 12, 2010 (UTC) Using "High" is still subjective. We should stick to the bar numbers for the stats as those have factual data. Reload times can be actually timed (should probably be polled a few times and use the average), and there should be two stats in that case as well, one for stock, and the other when you have the reload skill. Endofzero 03:17, August 12, 2010 (UTC)